Sekarreporter1 law points  1/29, 10:32] writer Vinothpandian: AIR 1986 SC 1682 : Raghunandan saran vs M/ S pearey lal workshop p ltd : If the words of statute are clear , there is no question of interpretation.grammatical construction has been accepted as the golden rule

[

Sekarreporter1 law points

1/29, 10:32] Vinothpandian: AIR 1986 SC 1682 : Raghunandan saran vs M/ S pearey lal workshop p ltd : If the words of statute are clear , there is no question of interpretation.grammatical construction has been accepted as the golden rule
[1/29, 10:32] Vinothpandian: AIR 2011 SC 2990 : sheelkumar jain vs new india assurance co ltd : It was held that when court makes an interpretation of any statutory provisions , it would be necessary for concerned court to have in mind the purpose of said provisions
[1/29, 10:32] Vinothpandian: AIR 1987 SC 1969 : Harsharan verma vs union of india : It is well accepted practice that courts did not undertake interpretation of the constitution unless there be a live issue before them
[1/30, 10:11] Vinothpandian: 2018 (5) MLJ 191 : Anil kumar jinabhai Patel vs pravinchandra jinabhai Patel: Arbitration and conciliation act 1996 section 34 (3) : The delivery of an arbitral award under section 31 (5) of the act is not a matter of mere formality, it is a matter of substance , limitation period of three months cannot be condoned beyond thirty days
[1/30, 10:11] Vinothpandian: 2020 (1) crimes SC 225 : sushila agarwal and others vs state ( NCT of Delhi) ; An accused can move application under section 438 CRPC 1973 before FIR is filed or before filing of charge sheet if FIR is registered , court can impose conditions including limited period of anticipatory bail
[1/30, 10:11] Vinothpandian: 2018 (2) DRTC 378 : Authorised officer state bank of india vs Allwyn Alloys pvt Ltd: No civil court can exercise jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter which a debt recovery tribunal or debt recovery appellate tribunal is empowered
[1/30, 10:32] Vinothpandian: 2019 (6) ALT 4 ( DB ) : M suryanarayana rao vs kotak mahindra bank : Held Banks and financial institutions alone can approach debts recovery tribunals for recovery of dues and individuals/ legal entities cannot approach tribunals as per the scheme of the act , if at all any counter claim they can ventilate same before competent civil court
[1/30, 10:32] Vinothpandian: 2019 (2) SCC ( cri ) 571 : Basalingappa vs mudibasappa : Acknowledged signature on the cheque raises presumption of the cheque pertaining to a legally enforceable debt or liability, section 139 of the negotiable instruments act imposes an evidentiary burden and not a persuasive burden , accused admitting his signature on the cheque , complainant not proving his financial capacity , acquittal of accused by trial court not perverse
[2/1, 09:39] Vinothpandian: 2018 (3) crimes SC 167 : kishan Rao vs shankargouda : High court cannot substitute its views for that of trial court that too without any legal basis , cannot exceed its revisional jurisdiction ( CRPC 1908 sec 397 / 401 )
[2/1, 09:39] Vinothpandian: 2018 (4) crimes ( SC ) 524 : vinod natesan vs state of kerala : merely not paying the amount due and payable under an agreement or not paying amount in lieu of one month notice before terminating agreement cannot be said to be cheating

You may also like...